Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Anthroposophical Adult Education

Expand Messages
  • carol
    S: « Moral Rearmament stands as a movement of religious renewal far surpassing anything that the Christian Community has ever accomplished. They (the CC) are,
    Message 1 of 34 , Dec 5, 2008
      S: « Moral Rearmament stands as a movement of religious renewal far
      surpassing anything that the Christian Community has ever accomplished.
      They (the CC) are, in fact, still at the Oxford Group level, intending
      more inward than outward these days. »




      «Far surpassing» ? I guess it depends on what «field of
      action» you're considering them for. The CC must remain an esoteric
      based, purely personal cultivation source – this is it's 'raison
      d'être'.




      MRA appears to be an exoteric spiritual movement – therefore, in
      essense, it does not oppose the sustaining of materialist perception in
      it's members - on the contrary, it is first and foremost, 'materialistic
      perception' dependent..




      S: «One of the very highest aims of MRA, outside of remaking human
      beings into spiritually-cognizant and morally responsible people, was to
      fight evil in the world. Its position was that fascism and communism
      were evils wherein the chaos of a developing human freedom were made a
      priority higher than the need for harmony and peace in the world. Thus,
      they sought to make leaders built in the mold of being peacemakers,
      largely in the third world under-developed countries, such as Africa,
      and especially South Vietnam...»

      My question is : How can the MRA FULLY achieve it's goals of
      'spiritually-cognizant and morally responsible people' if it does not
      furnish it's members with the « spiritual concepts » necessary for
      truly reaching to the core of the question of Evil? The founder of the
      Anthroposophical Mouvement did exactly this, and may I add, that this
      feat may not have been the easiest for the Higher Realms to put together
      and realize.

      I'm not suggesting that 'skimming the outer most layers' on the question
      of moral behavior worthy of our times, is not a good thing - it's just
      that, from an Anthroposophical perspective, any attempt to use such a
      model, as the set stardard for 'evaluation' world events, the times we
      are living, human freedom etc, would necessarily come to be compromised.
      Therefore, THIS standard as a spiritual base, as the core reference for
      determining worldly action, too easily allows for Ahrimanic and
      Luciferic infiltrations and curruption.





      S: «Moral Rearmament, therefore, is entirely christian personalist,
      to give it its due place within the realm of modern existentialist
      philosophies. It runs in the same stream as Mounier's form of
      Personalism, which was built and inspired out of the life of the Maid of
      Orleans, which Charles Peguy wrote a trilogy about. Do you know about
      Charles Peguy? He was shot in the head at the first Battle of Marne on
      September 5, 1914, thus offering up his fine etheric body to the astral
      world, in order to be
      the first to populate It with the unexpended etheric bodies of the dead.
      We know that this became a problem most profound for Archangel Michael
      to solve.»

      You know Steve, human beings do MOVE their collective evolution forward,
      in general, whether or not they actively develop for themselves, the
      soul organs for conscious soul perception or not. In the event that they
      do not, their spiritual self will necessarily propel to the surface of
      any given individual's conscious self what it knows it must impart to
      the world, what it knows it must impress, as a living memory, onto the
      earth's multi faceted environment- however imperfect this may come to
      manifest itself.






      S: «...You see, Moral Rearmament had a logical successor when Frank
      Buchman died in 1961; his right-hand man, Peter Howard. And Peter Howard
      continued on with vigor and enthusiasm until 1965, when he suffered a
      sudden and untimely death in South America, just before returning to the
      United States in order to finish a series of lectures before young
      college students wherein he had been informingthem of the role of the
      United States government in planning the takeover of the government of
      South Vietnam .....These lectures were of the nature of invoking the
      Honesty principle, come what may. And so, an honestly sincere and
      earnest family man died prematurely in order that the US government
      could run a war its way for ten years, in order to lose it and not care
      because its victory was inflicting war for ten years at a very important
      juncture in human history (1965-1975)...»

      So you see Steve, Honesty needs special protection - in our times. That
      is why Spritual Science exists – it allow souls to live more
      consciously, (in the spiritual sense) meaning that they can feel,
      understand, even foresee what lies before them and around them, they can
      also come to be foretold or fore advised of dangers. This can only
      effectively occur if such a soul HAS, as his/her posession, the
      necessary soul organs available for understanding the language of the
      Spirit.

      S: «Carol, please, if you are going to tout yourself as working out
      of subtle soul-spiritual streams on the etheric plane, then you need to
      leave the very superficial judgments out of account. You only hurt
      yourself and your supposed authenticity.»

      Only in your view, Steve. I do have something special to ask of you.
      Could you please, give space for CERTAIN others on this list to express
      the Anthroposophy which dwells within themselves without trying to
      twist and turn them and their ideas, in all ways possible. Can you
      possibly do this? It would be so much appreciated. C.

































      --- In anthroposophy@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Hale" <sardisian01@...>
      wrote:
      >
      >
      >
      > --- In anthroposophy@yahoogroups.com, "carol" organicethics@ wrote:
      > >
      >
      > > S: « One of the things, then, that I did to attempt to balance
      this
      > > perceived descent into the abyss was to find an organization that
      was
      > > concerned with the moral ideal of living to remake the world to the
      > good
      > > every day. And so I found Moral Rearmament, which had this objective
      > in
      > > mind and began to communicate my case for moral technology in light
      of
      > a
      > > science of the spirit.
      > >
      > > Do you or does anyone know about Moral Rearmament? »
      > > Just looked it up - it seems to be laced with a pure form of
      > > Protestantism ( an apparent no-no for the student of spiritual
      > science)
      > > and it's moral actions do come to be applied superficially in
      support
      > of
      > > 'military adventurism.'
      >
      >
      >
      > Presbyterian, actually. Frank Buchman went to Oxford in the 1920's in
      > order to cultivate a system of spiritual collaboration wherein the
      > principles of honesty, purity, unselfishness and love were brought
      forth
      > in an intimate setting of faith, hope and love; the universal catholic
      > trinity. From a more outwardly oriented standpoint, this Oxford Group
      > evolved into Moral Rearmament just before the outbreak of World War
      II.
      > And therein, the trinity of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity became
      the
      > hallmarks of this movement. Therefore, Moral Rearmament stands as a
      > movement of religious renewal far surpassing anything that the
      Christian
      > Community has ever accomplished. They (the CC) are, in fact, still at
      > the Oxford Group level, intending more inward than outward these days.
      >
      > One of the very highest aims of MRA, outside of remaking human beings
      > into spiritually-cognizant and morally responsible people, was to
      fight
      > evil in the world. Its position was that fascism and communism were
      > evils wherein the chaos of a developing human freedom were made a
      > priority higher than the need for harmony and peace in the world.
      Thus,
      > they sought to make leaders built in the mold of being peacemakers,
      > largely in the third world under-developed countries, such as Africa,
      > and especially South Vietnam.
      >
      > Moral Rearmament, therefore, is entirely christian personalist, to
      give
      > it its due place within the realm of modern existentialist
      philosophies.
      > It runs in the same stream as Mounier's form of Personalism, which was
      > built and inspired out of the life of the Maid of Orleans, which
      Charles
      > Peguy wrote a trilogy about. Do you know about Charles Peguy? He was
      > shot in the head at the first Battle of Marne on September 5, 1914,
      thus
      > offering up his fine etheric body to the astral world, in order to be
      > the first to populate It with the unexpended etheric bodies of the
      dead.
      > We know that this became a problem most profound for Archangel Michael
      > to solve.
      >
      > I have studied and involved my very being in the movement of moral
      > renewal for over ten years now, and have found it to be very
      compatible
      > with the anthroposophical movement as two interacting streams, with
      the
      > call to the russian folk soul interacting as the middle joinder.
      Again,
      > Carol, you treat me as if I lack all inner substance and force in
      > dedication to a world spiritual movement of renewal that serves the
      > Michael-Christ Impulse today.
      >
      > But I am as patient as it takes, and as forceful as I need to be in
      > order to get the results of the vision that Rudolf Steiner had with
      the
      > Christmas Conference of 1923. You see, Moral Rearmament had a logical
      > successor when Frank Buchman died in 1961; his right-hand man, Peter
      > Howard. And Peter Howard continued on with vigor and enthusiasm until
      > 1965, when he suffered a sudden and untimely death in South America,
      > just before returning to the United States in order to finish a series
      > of lectures before young college students wherein he had been
      informing
      > them of the role of the United States government in planning the
      > takeover of the government of South Vietnam, which involved a US
      backed
      > military coup that had killed the president of Vietnam and his
      brother,
      > the vice president. These lectures were of the nature of invoking the
      > Honesty principle, come what may. And so, an honestly sincere and
      > earnest family man died prematurely in order that the US government
      > could run a war its way for ten years, in order to lose it and not
      care
      > because its victory was inflicting war for ten years at a very
      important
      > juncture in human history (1965-1975).
      >
      > Carol, please, if you are going to tout yourself as working out of
      > subtle soul-spiritual streams on the etheric plane, then you need to
      > leave the very superficial judgments out of account. You only hurt
      > yourself and your supposed authenticity.
      >
      > Steve
      >
    • carol
      Re: Carol, I have great need to impart a truth that you and others may not yet be able to accept. It concerns how Steiner s selfless efforts on behalf of CC
      Message 34 of 34 , Dec 6, 2008
        Re: "Carol, I have great need to impart a truth that you and others may
        not yet be able to accept. It concerns how Steiner's selfless
        efforts on behalf of CC have been perverted in the aftermath of his
        death. Here is the lecture, as well as a specific notation
        concerning where, how, and why the dividing lines are drawn:... "

        OK, this renewal impulse must differ in some form on how the regular
        protestant denominations exercises the 'cultus' principal. That Rudolf
        Steiner allowed himself to indicate how to best exercise this cult
        principal - must mean that, somehow or another, it comes to reach more
        directly to a specific goal.

        I'm sorry, I've not sat in on a mass of the Christian Community - so I
        can't really judge - though Mark W. did tell me that he, as an
        Anthroposophist, was able to witness a little more of an Etheric
        Christic manifestation in a Christian Community mass than what he could
        come to see of 'IT' in a Catholic mass. (ex.the moment of the raising
        of bread and wine).

        A few years back, I attended a United Church Christmas mass with one of
        my sisters. Through this 'form of cultus' I noticed that the Christic
        principal presented itself solely as a 'personalized touch'.

        I guess I'll have to eventually force myself to go to a Christian
        Community mass to be able to derive for myself, my own personal
        assessment of it.

        C.





        "


        --- In anthroposophy@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Hale" <sardisian01@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > --- In anthroposophy@yahoogroups.com, "carol" organicethics@
        > wrote:
        > >
        > >
        > > S: « Steiner gave much supporting indication for this need in our
        > > time, especially the nature of Soradt's third incarnation due to
        > occur
        > > in 1998.
        > >
        > > Alas, they never followed through on his initiative to them to
        > > accomplish this task, and haven't, to this very day. Very par for
        > the
        > > course, it seems, in the overall re-assessment of what was sought;
        > first
        > > over nine days, then over nine months, and tragically not
        > forthcoming in
        > > the nine years leading to 1933. »
        > >
        > > Steve, the Christian Community cultivates a deepened Impulse –
        one
        > > must therefore look for it's 'effects' on a deepened soul level.-
        > where
        > > the time 'element' does not apply so immediately.
        > >
        > > You mentioned the 'Sorat' incarnation - another deep mystery, with
        > > external ramifications of course. I think you are going to have to
        > get
        > > used to the idea that Rudolf Steiner had, in his spirit, to set
        > several
        > > things up for humanity; what necessary safeguards i't' would need,
        > to
        > > cover, not only the immediate, more external soul reflective
        > qualities
        > > of man, but also all that applies to the underlying spiritual
        > > evolutionary principal to which man himself belongs.
        > >
        > > Therefore, from an external point of reference, it might seem that
        > > Anthroposophy and, as well, the Christian Community are doing very
        > > little in our time – but this may not be necessarily the case.
        > > Pathways may actually be being made on the finer human planes of
        > > 'action', so to speak - the etheric, the astral (including higher)
        > and
        > > even Devachanic.
        >
        >
        > Carol, I have great need to impart a truth that you and others may
        > not yet be able to accept. It concerns how Steiner's selfless
        > efforts on behalf of CC have been perverted in the aftermath of his
        > death. Here is the lecture, as well as a specific notation
        > concerning where, how, and why the dividing lines are drawn:
        >
        > http://wn.rsarchive.org/Lectures/RelMov_index.html
        >
        >
        > "For the welfare of both Movements it is essential that they should
        > be held clearly apart. Therefore in the beginning, since everything
        > depends on our developing the strength to carry out what we have set
        > our will to do, it is absolutely necessary in these early days that
        > the Movement for Religious Renewal should work in all directions in
        > circles outside the Anthroposophical Movement; that therefore,
        > neither as regards the acquisition of material means — in order
        that
        > the matter be clearly understood I must also speak about these
        > things — should it encroach on sources which in any event only
        flow
        > with great difficulty for the Anthroposophical Movement, nor, because
        > it does not at once succeed in finding adherents among non-
        > Anthroposophists, should it, for example, make proselytes within the
        > ranks of the Anthroposophists. Were it to do so, it would be doing
        > something that would inevitably lead to the destruction of both
        > Movements. It is really not a matter today of going forward with a
        > certain fanaticism, but of being conscious that we can do what is
        > necessary for man only when we work out of the necessity of the thing
        > itself.
        >
        > What I am now stating as consequences, were also equally the
        > preliminary conditions for lending my assistance in the founding of
        > the Movement for Religious Renewal, for only under these conditions
        > could I assist it. If these preliminary conditions had not been
        > there, the Movement for Religious Renewal would never have originated
        > through my advice.
        >
        > Therefore I beg you to understand that it is necessary for the
        > Movement for Religious Renewal to know that it must adhere to its
        > starting point, that it has promised to look for its adherents
        > outside the sphere of the Anthroposophical Movements, for it is there
        > that they can be found in the natural way, and there they must be
        > sought.
        >
        > What I have said to you has not been said because of any anxiety lest
        > something might be dug away from the Anthroposophical Movement, and
        > it has certainly not been said out of any personal motive, but solely
        > out of the necessity of the case itself. And it is also important to
        > understand in what way alone it is possible to work rightly in each
        > of these spheres of activity. It is indeed necessary that with regard
        > to important matters we should state quite clearly how the case
        > stands, for there is at the present time far too great a tendency to
        > blur things and not to see them clearly. But clarity is essential
        > today in every sphere.
        >
        > If therefore someone were to exclaim: The very one who himself put
        > this Movement for Religious Renewal into the world now speaks like
        > this!! ... well, my dear friends, the whole point is that if I had at
        > any time spoken differently about these things, I should not have
        > lent a hand towards founding this Movement for Religious Renewal. It
        > must remain at its starting point. What I am now saying, I am of
        > course saying merely in order that these things may be correctly
        > understood in the Anthroposophical Society and so that it shall not
        > be said (as is reported to have happened already): The
        > Anthroposophical Movement did not get on very well, and so now they
        > have founded the Movement for Religious Renewal as the right thing.
        > I am quite sure that the very excellent and outstanding individuals
        > who have founded the Movement for Religious Renewal will oppose any
        > such legend most vigorously, and will also sternly refuse to make
        > proselytes within the Anthroposophical Movement. — But, as has
        been
        > said, the matter must be rightly understood within the
        > Anthroposophical Movement itself.
        >
        > I know, my dear friends, that there are always some who find it
        > unpleasant to hear explanations such as these — which are
        necessary
        > from time to time, not in order to complain in one direction or
        > another, nor for the sake of criticism, but solely in order to
        > present something once and for all in its true light. I know there
        > are always some who dislike it when clarity is substituted for
        > nebulous obscurity. But this is absolutely essential for the welfare
        > and growth of the Anthroposophical Movement as well as of the
        > Movement for Religious Renewal. The Movement for Religious Renewal
        > cannot flourish if it in any way damages the Anthroposophical
        > Movement.
        >
        > This must be thoroughly understood, especially by Anthroposophists,
        > so that whenever it is necessary to stand up for the rights of the
        > matter, they may really be able to do so. When, therefore, there is
        > any question about an anthroposophist's attitude towards religious
        > renewal, he must be clear that his attitude can only be that of an
        > adviser, that he gives what he can give in the way of spiritual
        > possessions, and when it is a case of participating in the
        > ceremonies, that he is conscious of doing so in order to help these
        > ceremonies on their way. He alone can be a spiritual helper of the
        > Movement for Religious Renewal who is himself first a good
        > anthroposophist. But this Movement for Religious Renewal must be
        > sustained, in every direction, by persons who, because of the
        > particular configuration and tendencies of their spiritual life,
        > cannot yet find their way into the Anthroposophical Society itself.
        > I hope that none of you will now go to someone who is doing active
        > work in the Movement for Religious Renewal and say: This or that has
        > been said against it in Dornach. — Nothing has been said against
        it.
        > In love and in devotion to the spiritual world the Movement for
        > Religious Renewal has been given counsel from out of the spiritual
        > world, in order that it might rightly found itself. But the fact must
        > be known by Anthroposophists that it has founded itse1f out of
        > itself, that it has formed — not, it is true, the content of its
        > ritual, but the fact of its ritual, out of its own force and its own
        > initiative, and that the essential core of the Anthroposophical
        > Movement has nothing to do with the Movement for Religious Renewal.
        > Certainly no wish could be stronger than mine that the Movement for
        > Religious Renewal shall grow and flourish more and more, but always
        > in adherence to the original intentions. Anthroposophical Groups must
        > not be changed into communities for religious renewal, either in a
        > materia1 or in a spiritual sense.
        >
        > I was obliged to say this today, for, as you know, counsel and advice
        > had to be given for a Cult, a Cult whose growth in our present time
        > is earnestly desired by me. In order that no misunderstanding should
        > arise in regard to this Cult when I speak tomorrow of the conditions
        > of the life of Cult in the spiritual world, I felt it necessary to
        > insert these words today as an episode in our course of lectures."
        >
        > (The following night the first Goetheanum was destroyed by fire.)
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.